That I brought the rules into the discussion was to show how DMs are left to their own devices. And now I'm talking about DMs that run published campaigns. They read the DMG too.
That the rulebook dicusses the issue is to no help when you don't write adventures yourself. The writer whose work you buy is supposed to have read that stuff.
Besides, for all its discussion there is still next to zero actual enforcement mechanisms.
I don't think that's a fair read of what you wrote. It might have been what you were thinking, but it's not really what you wrote to start this thread. As a reminder:
The spiel, btw, is "just add time constraints through your story". But that's just dishonest - it's not part of either the rules or its supplements.
When you specify "not part of the rules or its supplements" you seem to be making it clear that being part of the rules is at least a meaningful part of your point.
Now, here comes the elephant(s) in the room, that nobody seems to actually want to discuss:
* The official published scenarios never* provide what's needed to enforce this attrition.
* The rules never enforce any attrition.
* In fact, the rules bend over backwards making attrition as unenforceable as possible.
When you give a list of three items, and two out of those three items specify the rules rather than the published scenarios, it seems fair to say the rules are a meaningful part of your point.
So when you say,
You don't get to misinterpret my mention of the rules to say my points are incorrect.
I think that's a blatantly unfair accusation. I didn't misinterpret your mention of the rules. I presented them with full context, and they very clearly highlighted the rules as a meaningful part of your point. Indeed, any way you look at that first post, you're either saying the rules are 50% of your point, or 66% of your point. It's how you stated your point: rules and supplements, or published adventures and rules and rules.
The rules do in fact address this issue. They do not "enforce" the issue because that's not a useful measurement when discussing RPG rules and this topic. They give you a tool to address an issue if that issue arises in your group. It does not necessarily arise in every group because there's too much group variation for it to be a generalization. Not every group uses combat as often as other groups, not every group has a party composition that gets a lot out of short rests, not every group wants to take pauses as often as other groups, and of course not every adventure allows for more frequent resting. But if you run into the issue in your group, they give you a tool to address that issue. And that seemed to be your point. You claimed there was no good means to add constraints on resting provided in the rules. But, there is. So yes, that portion of your point appears incorrect.
I have never said the DMG is devoid of adventure writing advice.
Strawman. Neither I, nor anyone else here, has ever claimed you made such a general statement. I was addressing your much more specific statement concerning placing constraints on resting. The DMG does provide a tool to offer constraints on resting.
I am saying there is little to no enforcement in the rules as a whole, and that there are more rules that work against enforcement than toward it.
As I said, "enforcement" is an odd approach. IF the issue comes up, the rules provide a tool to help address that issue. The rules do not work against using that tool. In fact the spells you mention ultimately run counter to your point - if the party is expending precious limited resources to rest, only to end up with a random encounter as they exit the rest causing them to rest again, it sure seems like that's a self-defeating method of resting. The rules (multi-part encounters and random encounters and instructions on how to use time constraints and rest interruption) appear to deal with this fine and do not work against doing that.
The rules don't get away with hundreds of pages that ignore the issue, and then simply writing a few paragraphs that off-load the burden on the DM (or adventure writer). Where are the actual enforcement variants?
First of all, quantity of rules is meaningless. It's quality of those rules to address the issue that is the only thing that's got meaning. And the rules we're talking about, which is about 8 pages in the DMG between chapter 3 and chapter 5, address it fine in my opinion.
Second, it's not "off-loading the burden" on the DM. A list of random encounters and a time frame to check for those encounters, or a built-in multi-part encounter, means the bulk of the burden is on the adventure writer and not the DM. Now if an adventure said, "you should maybe come up with some random encounters" and left it to the DM to determine everything about those random encounters, then you'd be correct. But that's not an accurate scenario.
As for "enforcement variants" that's again not a very useful construct. It's not an issue of "enforcement" it's an issue of toolsets.
Excellent. Now, what are your thoughts about Tyranny, Abyss, Strahd, Thunder and Yawning? Would you say Princes is typical or atypical? ...So Princes get an OK from you. That's great to hear! Any other WotC 5e modules you'd like to share info on? Or do you concede my point that this stuff is mostly absent from the edition, even though it's more central to balance than ever?
That's not a particularly fair response Cap. You didn't specify a list to start with, you made a broad statement about how the rules and adventures don't have any support for this issue. I addressed the rules and then spent a lot of time to go through literally a random adventure that I happened to have, covering hundreds of pages and giving you specific exact quotes so you can see how a published adventure addresses this issue. And now you're argument has become a moving target - I addressed your generalization so you just shift to some other adventure without having specified one to begin with. Not fair. Pretty clear if I chose a second one, you would just punt on that one too and claim I had not covered some other set of adventures.
I am not going to address every single adventure. First, because I don't own them all. Second, because that's not a fair burden to put on anyone.
I do have Storm King's Thunder handy. I am not going to go page by page through that adventure though, because you already demonstrated that's mostly a waste of my time as you will just dismiss it as "one adventure". But I will say the adventure does have similar references all over the place to random encounters, it has a huge section in chapter three on the topic, it gives some guidelines on how to use it, and includes this text:
"Characters exploring the North are likely to encounter wandering monsters. Such encounters can occur as often as you like-but keep in mind that too many random encounters can bog down the adventure and cause players to lose interest in the story. You can roll on the Random Wilderness Encounters table or choose an appropriate encounter. Each encounter is described in more detail after the table. For guidelines on how to use random encounters effectively, see "Random Encounters" in chapter 3 of the Dungeon Master's Guide..."
And then it proceeds to provide a truly huge list of random encounters and variations based on the terrain the characters are traversing and a change for percentage odds based on that terrain, including Forest, Grassland, Hills, Moors, Mountains, Roads, Trails, Sea, and Tundra. And every one of those encounters has a full write-up.
Then there is a second section just for Ice Wind Dale random encounters, with similar level of detailing.
Then there is a third section just for random encounters during Air Travel.
There are also several multi-stage combat situations and patrol situations that can also put constraints on too much resting.
Now you might say that most of these are non-dungeon oriented, and you'd be right. But, that's because this adventure is non-dungeon oriented. It's an adventure that involves a lot of travel, outdoors. So the encounters are tailored to the adventure. But if you try to overdo resting during this adventure, they've given you the tools to interrupt that, and to keep the adventure moving and drain the character resources if they try to do that.
And it's not some huge burden on the DM. There is no need to reinvent the wheel. If the issue arises where you as the DM feel the party is resting too often and the adventure is bogging down from that or meaningfully being altered because of it, the adventure gives you an easy tool to use to address it. All you need to do is roll either a percentage dice or d20, depending on the location, and you have your random encounter to interrupt the rest with. Or you can skip that step and just choose an appropriate random encounter. Either way, not a lot of burden on the DM there, as the adventure writer went to a lot of effort to create some detailed encounters for you to use, complete with descriptions and stats and tactics and treasure and terrain suggestions and everything.
I hope I do not get another "but that's just one adventure" hand-waive response. If me looking through the two adventures I have here (and it's not like we're talking about a looooong list of adventures that are out for 5e) isn't enough to demonstrate this issue is in fact considered by both the rules and the adventures, then I'd suggest you're trying to "win" an argument more than actually get to the bottom of your question regarding whether it's an issue that's addressed.